Letters 5-09-08

Friday

May 9, 2008 at 6:31 AMMay 9, 2008 at 6:33 AM

Are they really libertarians under the skin?

Lyle Rossiter Jr. (Press Dispatch, April 27) complains that "under liberalism it is the government's job to take the stress out of your life," creating a sense of entitlement and resulting in a welfare nanny state. It is his opinion that "liberals don't think it's reasonable to ask you to be responsible for yourself, to assume life's risks, to take the consequences of your actions, to hold yourself accountable."

I find his remarks so on the mark, so relevant to society today.

Ronald Deziel (Letters, May 4) pooh-poohs all of that as liberal bashing by a conservative. He, in turn, complains that conservatism is responsible for "mega-bailouts of mismanaged corporate behemoths" and "tax concessions to the whiny owners of this country's wealth."

Not being privy to them, I don't know much about these tax concessions he is talking about, but his point about government providing a safety net for mismanaged, failing private enterprises also hits the mark.

While they seem to be at odds with each other, coming from the left and from the right, notice they are both complaining about the same thing — too much big government meddling in things where it doesn't belong. Perhaps they are both libertarians but don't realize it.

Never mind the fact that the landlord has invested his own money and a myriad of other intangibles in order to provide housing.

Never mind the landlord has the maintenance responsibility of the building.

Never mind the outrageous insurance premiums or the very real possibility that the renter might trash the unit, which can cost thousands of dollars in repairs.

No problem, just follow Mr. Freeman's economic philosophy and charge renters an at-cost fee.While we're at it let's regulate all investors, from fast food restaurants to supermarkets, right up to and including every single "Free Enterprise" endeavor. These people aren't entitled to a profit either. Heck, let's just let government supply us with everything.

The problem with this scenario is that without the investment of private enterprise there are no taxes to be confiscated by government. The fact is, with capital investment, jobs are created, the investor reaps a profit, and this motivates others to do the same.

This profit motive brings more apartments and in turn "competition" which is beneficial to the renter.

Rent control stymies any new investment. No profit? No investment.

It's as simple as that.

Darrel HagenVictorville

Republicans can't clean up the mess they created

Judith Gleason's (Letters, April 27) response to my April 14 "desperate Republicans" letter is an excellent example of the desperation Republicans are feeling as it all slips away.

In an attempt to switch attention away from the sorry state of the Republican party, Mrs. Gleason cites Monica Lewinsky. The "permanent Republican majority" of Karl Rove is in disarray, the K Street project of Tom DeLay is disbanded, a Democratic majority is in Congress and Mrs. Gleason wants to discuss Monica? Truly, this is desperation.

There is a tremendous political inertia involved in running this county. The Democrats are working on cleaning up the messes from several decades of Republican mismanagement and this process may take quite a while. Yet, Mrs. Gleason is aghast at the slow pace.

In response, allow me to quote Albert Einstein: "The significant problems we have cannot be solved at the same level of thinking with which we created them." We do not need Republicans to solve the problems they have created; we need Democrats to do that.

My recommendation? Mrs. Gleason should check back in a generation or so to see the results. In the meantime, trust (the future) President B. Hussein Obama and the (current and future) Democratic majority in Congress. It's the least she can do.

John ParkApple Valley

Efficiency no excuse for mayor's incivility

At a recent meeting of the Apple Valley Town Council, I witnessed a very rude outburst from the council dais. I realize that certain members have an agenda, as we all do, but opposition to that agenda is no reason for rude behavior.

After a speaker voiced an objection to a proposed development in the Deep Creek area, there was a smattering of applause. This brought about a loud outburst from the mayor, who obviously is a proponent of this development.

I understand that one of the mayor's desires is that the meetings be as short as possible, but efficiency is no excuse for incivility.

Richard RorexApple Valley

Never miss a story

Choose the plan that's right for you.
Digital access or digital and print delivery.